
Glass. 
Book. 



V3\5_ 



.S55X 



EVIDENCE 

TAKEN BY AUTHORITY OF THE HONORABLE, THE SECRETARY -^ 
OF THE TREASURY', 



REPORT OF THE COMMITTEE OF CLAIMS, 



AND A RESOLUTION CONCURRED IN 



HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, 

In the Case of Indemnity of 

CHARLES F, 8IBBALD9 

OF PHILADELPHIA. 



Together with the Official Orders and Documents in relation to the 
same, obtained from the Executive Departments at Washington. 



PHILADELPHIA: 
PRINTED BY JOHN RICHARDS. 

1837. 






t ^ H 9. 



% ^ 



24th Congress, [Rep. No. 233.] Ho. of Reps. 

2d Session. 



St 



CHARLES F. SIBBALD. 



March 3, 1837. 
Read, and the Resolution therein contained concurred in by the House. 



n^ Mr. E. Whittlesey, from the Committee of Claims, to which the 
'■^ claim of Charles F. Sibbald had been referred, made the following 

J REPORT. 



Tlie Committee of Claims, to which was referred the petition of 
Charles F. Sibbald, report: 

The following is a concise statement of the facts : 

Mr. Sibbald had a claim to a tract of Land in Florida, containing 
Live Oak and other timber, and for the sawing of which he erected a 
Saw Mill. 

The United States sent an Agent to Florida, to preserve the Live 
Oak timber on the public land, according to the laws in force in rela- 
tion to that subject. The petitioner says he had made contracts for 
the delivery" of sawed timber, and had expended large sums of money 
in erecting Mills for that purpose, and in other expenditures for carry- 
ing into effect his contracts, and for realizing profits from his pro- 
perty. 

The complaint is, that the Agent so sent to Florida, by his own in- 
terference, and by the authority vested in him, called on others to dis- 
possess the petitioner ; and that he was so dispossessed, and from that 
time to the present has been prevented from enjoying his landed estate, 
with his Mills, under the pretence that the title to the Land was in the 
United States. A suit for trying the title resulted in a decision by the 
Supreme Court of the United States in favor of the petitioner. He 
says, that during the time the suit was pending, and he was held out 
of possession, his Mills have gone to dilapidation and decay, and that 
they are now destroyed. He asks compensation for his losses. They 
are said to be very great. 



The committee sent to tlie Navy and Treasury Departments for in- 
formation in reference to the appointment of an Agent, and to the acts 
he did. Answers were received showing neither Depai'tment pos^ 
jessed any intelligence of any importance ; the committee refer to their 
correspondence on this subject subsequent to the answers mentioned. 
Mr. Sibbald has obtained from the Navy Department, and from the 
Treasury Department, copies of several documents that are on file 
with the other papers. The committee wrote to Mr. Eakin, in Flori- 
da, who was the Agent mentioned, as to his authority, and also as to 
his acts. His answer is received, but it is not in the form, nor under 
the solemnity, of a deposition. 

The committee wrote to James Dill, John Warner, and Isaiah 
Hart, in Florida, for their depositions. An answer has just arrived 
from Mr, Warner, but without oath. 

The petitioner has been extremely solicitous to submit the decision 
of this claim to one of the courts of the United States. 

The committee think Congress should not permit suits to be com- 
menced against the United States, unless in a very rare and extraor- 
dinary case. They think, however, the facts are not sufficiently dis- 
closed to enable them to come to any decision, either as to the liability 
of the United States, or as to the damages the petitioner may have 
sustained. 

The petition was presented at the last session, but at too late a day 
for examination. At this session, the committee have used all the 
diligence the time allotted to them has permitted, to obtain the neces- 
sary evidence ; but, owing to the distance of the residence of the wit- 
nesses from the seat of Government, and the Indian hostilities that 
have existed in Florida, they have not accomplished their object. 

The committee propose to refer the subject to the Secretary of the 
Treasury, to take testimony, and submit it at the next session of Con- 
gress. They think the questions of , too great importance to be acted 
xjn when only partial information is obtained. 

The following resolutions are submitted: 

Resolved, That the Committee of Claims be discharged from the 
further consideration of the petition and papers of Charles F. Sibbald ; 
and that the same be referred to the Secretary of the Treasury, to take 
and receive testimony : 

1st, As to the authority given to any Agent or Officer of the Gov- 
ernment relative to the preservation of Live Oak timber in Florida on 
the public land. 



2d. As to whether any special authority was given relative to the 
land claimed by Charles F. Sibbald. 

3d. As to the act or acts of any Agent or Officer of the United 
States relative to dispossessing the said Charles F. Sibbald from his 
Land in Florida, with the particulars and circumstances under which 
said act or acts were performed, and the kind of act, and the time 
when performed. 

4th. As to who had possession of said Land, and the kind of pos- 
session, from the time the petitioner states in his petition he was dis- 
possessed, until the decision of the Supreme Court, mentioned in the 
petition. 

5th. As to the depreciation in value of said property, and also as to 
its destruction, during said time, and the cause thereof. 

6th. As to any other matter connected with a full development of 
all the facts in the case, if said Secretary shall think further testimony 
shall be necessary for the purpose indicated in this resolution. 

Resolved, That the said Secretary be authorized to employ a suit- 
able Agent, to take said testimony. 

Resolved, That the said Charles F. Sibbald have reasonable notice 
of the time and place of taking said testimony ; and that he give such 
notice if he takes testimony on his part. 

Resolved, That it is inexpedient to make any decision as to the 
liability of the United States, until the facts in the case shall be made 
known. 



INTERROGATORIES 

PREPARED AT THE TREASURY DEPARTMENT, UNDER THE AUTHORITY 
OF THE FOREGOING 

RESOLUTION OF THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

OF THE VMITED STATES. 



1st Interrogatory. Are you acquainted with Charles F. Sibbald, 
and do you know any thing respecting his Lands in Florida, their 
quality, and the quantity and quality of timber thereon ? 

2nd Interrogatory. Were any Saw Mills, and what, erected there- 
on ? What was their power and cost ? And what amount of sawing 
could they execute per diem ? and how many days in the year could 
they be operated ? 

Srd Interrogatory. Was the said Sibbald dispossessed of his Lands 
or Mills, or deprived of the use of them, between the years 1826 and 
1837, and by whom? Was he forbidden or prevented from cutting 
timber, and of what kinds, from said Lands, and by whom? And 
particularly were such persons Officers or Agents of the Government 
of the United States ? 

4:th Interrogatory. For how long a time was said Sibbald dispos- 
sessed or deprived of the use of his timber Lands and Mills, and who 
had possession of them during that time ? 

5th Interrogatory. Were the Mills of said Sibbald, or his Lands, 
or timber, injured, and to what extent, by reason of his being dispos- 
sessed thereof, or forbidden or deprived the use thereof? 

Gth Interrogatory. Was the sawing of timber a profitable business 
at the time Mr. Sibbald's property was taken possession of and his 
business broken up ? and what amount of damage did said Sibbald, in 



8 

your opinion, suffer in consequence of this interference with his pro- 
perty? Did he abandon his Mills, and if so, for what reason? 

llh Interrogatory. Did said property suffer depreciation, and to 
what extent? or was any part of it destroyed, and how much, while 
said Sibbald was deprived of its possession and use ? Was such de- 
preciation owing in part or whole, and what part, to negligence or 
want of prudence and care on the part of said Sibbald ? 

%th Interrogatory. Was said Sibbald's property attached by his 
creditors, or was any other legal process served on it in consequence 
of the embarrassment brought upon him by any act of the Govern- 
ment or its Officers ? 

Qth Interrogatory. Was said Sibbald deprived of the benefit of any 
contracts, and what, by the interference on the part of the Govern- 
ment Agents or Officers with his property, and what damage did he 
suffer in consequence thereof? 

10//i Interrogatory. What other matter or thing do you know or 
believe in relation to the subject of the present inquiry concerning 
damage alleged to be suffered by said Sibbald in consequence of the 
interruption of the possession and use of his property in Florida by 
the Officers or Agents of the Government of the United States ? State 
fully all you know respecting this matter. 



IN THE MATTER 



OF THE 



CLAIM OF CHARLES F. SIBBALD, 



INTERROGATORIES to be administered to Witnesses produced 
on behalf of the above mentioned Charles F. Sibbald, and to be ad- 
ministered as Cross Interrogatories to any Witnesses produced on 
behalf of the United States, in reference to said claim. 

I. Do you or do you not know Charles F. Sibbald, the Petitioner, 
and how long have you been acquainted with him ? 

II. Have you any knowledge of the " Panama Steam Saw Mills," 
said to have been erected by Charles F. Sibbald on his Land on the 
River St. John's, in East Florida, at its junction with the River St. 
George or Trout Creek? How did your knowledge in relation there- 
to arise ? How many Mills were erected by him at that place, or any 
other, on his said Lands on said River? What was the power of said 
Mills, each and all of them ? What number of gangs of Saws was 
attached to them, or either, or any of them ? 

III. Did or did not the said Charles F. Sibbald possess any parti- 
cular advantages for carrying on the said Mills ? Had he or had he 
not timber of his own before they were erected with which such Mills 
might be advantageously supplied ? What was the quality of his 
timber ? Had he or had he not other Lands in Florida ? What was 
the quality of such other Lands ? To what culture were they espe- 
cially adapted ? What was the principal growth of timber upon them ? 
Was or was not the place where said Mills were erected a healthy 
situation? Was it or was it not possessed of advantages for business 
at all seasons of the year ? 

2 



10 

IV. Was or was not the said Charles F. Sibbald dispossessed of any 
part or the whole of said Lands ? By whom was that dispossession 
effected? Were or were not the persons acting under the authority 
of the Government of the United States ? State such authority and 
the directions on which it was founded. What acts were done by 
them ? AVere or were not the persons employed in cutting timber 
driven from their work ? Was he or was he not prevented from using 
his timber? State the circumstances particularly and at large, and 
wlicther the said Charles F. Sibbald was or was not compelled to 
abandon his Lands and Mills ? What were the threats and means re- 
sorted to, to bring about this result? 

V. Were or were not any conti-acts made for cutting Live Oak tim- 
ber from the said Florida Lands ? With whom were such contracts 
made ? Were or were not any contracts made for the purpose of fur- 
nishing hewed Live Oak timber from the said Lands ? Were or were 
not such contracts prevented from being fulfilled ? By what means 
and by what persons ? State if you can the extent of said contracts, 
and the liabilities which ensued from any non-compliance with them. 

VL Had or had not the said Charles F. Sibbald been for any length 
of time, and how long, in the peaceable enjoyment of said property? 
Were or were not the Mills put into operation ? Were they or were 
they not susceptible of profitable and pi'osperous operation? What 
quantity of lumber could they saw ? What profit per day would they 
have made if they had been undisturbed? What price did lumber 
bear per superficial foot at the Mills ? Were there or were there nol 
at the time any other extensive Mills on the St. John's River? 

VIL What amount of money was expended by the said Charles F. 
Sibbald in erecting his Mills in Florida? Had he or had he not made 
any arrangements for the use of Woodworth's Patent Planing Ma- 
chines at his said Mills ? Has he or has he not realized the profits or 
advantage of these Machines ? If not, what has prevented him from 
so doing? 

VIII. What would have been the cost of planing lumber with the 
same Engines which the said Mills were using? AVhat was and is 
the price of planed flooring boards in Philadelphia? What is the price 
of unplaned flooring boards at the same place ? What is the difference 
in freight between planed and unplaned boards ? 



11 

IX. Did or did not the said Charles F. Sibbald keep a store for the 
sale of Goods at Panama ? What amount of goods could he dispose 
of per annum ? What were the annual profits made upon such sales ? 

X. Were or were not any arrangements made by the said Charles 
F. Sibbald for building ships or other vessels at Panama ? Was or 
was not such business commenced by him ? Could or could not such 
business have been advantageously and profitably carried on at that 
place if it had been undisturbed ? Had or had not the said Charles F. 
Sibbald any vessels of his own engaged in the business of the Mills ? 
If so, what became of them ? Were or were not chartered vessels so 
engaged ? To what number and extent ? 

XI. Did or did not vessels under Spanish colours come to the said 
Mills ? What was the course of their voyages ? Was there or was 
there not any particular inducements for pursuing that course of busi- 
ness under the Florida treaty ? 

XII. Was or was not other business carried on by the said Charles 
F. Sibbald at Panama? Did he or did he not purchase Sea Island 
cotton advantageously ? Did he or did he not make contracts for tim- 
ber, cut by axes, exclusively of the business of the Mills ? 

XIII. Has or has not the business of the said Charles F. Sibbald, 
in its various branches and details, been destroyed by the means be- 
fore referred to, of the Government of the United States ? Have or 
have not his Mills been recently in operation ? How long a time has 
elapsed since they have been in operation ? In whose possession have 
they been ? How did they pass out of the possession of their proprie- 
tor, and what circumstances have prevented their operation and use 
by himself? What is now and what has been for some time past the 
actual condition of the said Mills ? 

XIV. Do you or do you not know of any commercial houses in the 
City of New York or elsewhere with whom Charles F. Sibbald en- 
joyed extensive credit, that withdrew those credits in consequence of 
the course adopted against his Lands and Mills by the Officers of the 
United States ? Has or has not the said Charles F. Sibbald suffered 
irretrievable loss in commercial credit, by reason of the measures pur- 
sued against him, by the authorities or Officers of the Government of 
the United States? Can you estimate that loss? Do you know for 



12 

how many years these measures afiected said Charles F. Sibbald, and 
operated agamst his business pursuits as a Merchant, in the City of 
Philadelphia? 

XV. Did or did not any other cause whatever exist for the destruc- 
tion of the business of the said Charles F. Sibbald, except the inter- 
position of the Agents or Officers of the Government? 

: JOS. R. INGERSOLL, 

ST. GEO. T. CAMPBELL, 

For the Petitioner. 



DEPOSITION OF CHARLES SNOWDEN, 

Of the City of Philadelphia, Sea Captain, a Witness produced on the 
part of Charles F. Sibbald, and examined in the presence of the 
Attorney of the United States, at Philadelphia, on the 27th of May, 
A. D. 1837, sworn and subscribed before George Bartram, Esq., 
an Alderman of the said City. 

To the first Interrogatory on the part of the United States, he 
answers : 

I do know Charles F. Sibbald, and have been acquainted with him 
all my life. I know that there was a grant of sixteen thousand acres 
of Land in Florida, made by the Spanish Government to him. It 
embraced some of the most valuable Lands in Florida for the culture 
of sugar. Live Oak and Pine timber are the principal growth ; the 
growth of timber is very thick, and the quality good. 

To the second Interrogatory on the part of the United States, he 
answers : 

Mr. Sibbald erected three Steam Saw Mills, and a Water Saw Mill, 
on his Lands on the River St. Johns. One of these Mills had eight 
gangs of Saws attached to it, and worked forty-eight Saws at once, 
with a seventy horse power Steam Engine attached to it. His Mills 
could cut twenty thousand superficial feet of lumber per day out of 
round logs, using half of the Saws to slab with. If hewed square logs 
had been used, such as are used in Carolina and Georgia, nearly dou- 
ble that quantity might have been sawed. The Steam Mills cost, by 
Mr. Sibbald's books, eighty-two thousand dollars, to 1830; the three 
Steam Mills. They could be operated three hundred days in the 
year, or about that. 

To the third Interrogatory on the part of the United States, he 
answers : 

Mr. Sibbald was dispossessed of his Lands, and prevented from 
using them, from the year 1828, to the year 1836, when his title to 



14 

the Land was confirmed by the Supreme Court of the United States, 
He was during this time prevented from cutting timber for the use of 
his Mills; both Pine timber and Live Oak, to execute his contracts. 
He was dispossessed by William D. Acken ; he was commissioned by 
the Navy Department; he was the most active in the business; he 
was an Officer and Agent of the Government of the United States. 
This act of the Government also dispossessed him of his Saw Mills. 

To the fourth Literrogatory on the part of the United States, he 
answers : 

Mr. Sibbald was deprived of the use of his Lands from the year 
1828, to the year 1836, and completely dispossessed of his Mills from 
the year 1830, to the present time, and the profits were lost by the 
measures pursued by the Government in relation to his property.— 
The Marshall of the United States had possession during nearly the 
whole of the time last mentioned. 

To the fifth Interrogatory on the part of the United States, he 
answers : 

The Mills have gone to ruin ; the Lands in Mr. Sibbald's grant 
have been pillaged to a great extent by depredators whom it was im- 
possible to control, by reason of his property being treated as public 
property by the Government Agents, and the public authorities. 

To the sixth Interrogatory on the part of the United States, he 
answers : 

Sawing timber was at that time, and is now, a very profitable busi- 
ness ; his damages were very great, and I can give them in detail 
when asked. His Mills were taken out of his possession by means 
adopted by the Officers of the Government, and he was consequently 
obliged to abandon them. 

To the seventh Interrogatory on the part of the United States, he 
answers : 

The Mills were new and in perfect order in the year 1830, when 
they were taken out of Mr. Sibbald's control and possession, and have 
since become a total loss by dilapidation and decay, which he could 
not prevent, as he had no control over them. 



15 

To the eighth Interrogatory on the part of the United States, he 
answers : 

Legal process was served on the Mills by the workmen on the pre- 
mises ; entirely owing, as I believe, to the embarrassment brought on 
him by the Government of the United States. I believe these liabili- 
ties did not exceed four thousand dollars. 

To the ninth Interrogatory on the part of the United States, he 
answers : 

He was deprived of the benefit of extensive contracts for Live Oak 
timber; one witli Mr. Samuel Grice of this City, who was to have 
paid him a clear profit of sixteen thousand dollars for the timber, or 
about that. I also understood that Mr. Sibbald made extensive con- 
tracts with the Navy Department for Live Oak timber, which he was 
prevented from cutting; hewed timber, and not that which passed 
through the Mills. These contracts together, exceeded, as I have 
understood, three hundred thousand dollars. I cannot estimate the 
damages, but I believe that bonds are always required for a third of 
the amounts of the contracts. 

To the tenth Interrogatory on the part of the United States, he 
answers : 

I believe Mr. Sibbald has suffered a large amount of losses, more 
than I have specified, and which I will state in answer to such inter- 
rogatories as may be proposed by him. His losses have been occa- 
sioned entirely by the interference of the Government with his proper- 
ty and I'ights. There are many persons dead whom I know of, that 
would have been able to give material testimony in behalf of Mr. Sib- 
bald ; some of them indeed principal witnesses, being engaged about 
the works the greater part of the time — among these were Chester 
Sully, who was agent pro tem. there for some time ; Samuel S. Pear- 
son, superintendent of the Mills; William K. Underwood, sawyer; 
John Gribbald, mason; John Games, carpenter; Richard Sims, who 
was employed about the Mills. These persons were all from Phila- 
delphia. 

To the first Interrogatory on the part of Charles F. Sibbald, he 
answers : 

I refer to my answer to the first Interrogatory on the part of the 
United States. 



16 

To the second Interrogatory on the part of Charles F. Sibbald, he 
answers : 

I refer to my answers to the preceding Interrogatories for my reply 
to the principal part of this. I was Agent for Mr. Sibbald during the 
greater part of two years; the years 1829 and 1830. 

To the third Interrogatory on the part of Charles F. Sibbald, he 
answers : 

In addition to what I have before stated of Mr. Sibbald's advantages, 
I may add that he had three tracts of land all embraced in the same 
grant before spoken of, well calculated for furnishing timber; and 
those perhaps not needed for supplying the Saw Mills Avere especially 
calculated for the culture of sugar. The place where the Mills were 
erected was remarkably healthy all the year round ; we were never 
driven away; and this was a very important advantage. 

To the fourth Interrogatory on the part of Charles F. Sibbald, he 
answers : 

Mr. Sibbald was, as before stated, dispossessed of his Lands and 
Mills by the Officer and Agent of the United States, Mr. William D. 
Acken; he was a special Agent of the Government sent from Wash- 
ington, and acted with Mr. Douglass, the District Attorney ; he stop- 
ped Mr. Samuel Grice from cutting Live Oak timber on the Lands 
claimed by Mr. Sibbald, and forbid me from having Pine timber cut 
to supply the Saw Mills; the people I sent on Mr. Sibbald's Lands to 
cut Mill Logs were driven from their work by Mr. Acken, and he 
threatened me with an injunction, arrest, and imprisonment, and to 
bring a detachment of troops from St. Augustine and put me in the 
fort, — as I wrote to Mr. Sibbald at the time. He also seized the Mill 
Logs cut for the use of the Mills, and threw every possible obstacle 
in my way, tilll was compelled to submit. 

To the fifth Interrogatory on the part of Charles F. Sibbald, he 
answers : 

I have already replied to this question in my answer to the ninth 
Interrogatory on the part of the United States. 

To the sixth Interrogatory on the part of Charles F. Sibbald, he 
answers : 

I believe Mr. Sibbald had peaceable possession from the year 1816, 
to the year 1828. To the remainder of this question, I reply, that 



1^ 

the Mills were put in operation, and that I have made an estimate as 
they were in operation, of the expenses and profit; this estimate is 
hereto annexed, marked A, and shows the profits to be one hundred 
and seventy-four dollars and fifty-two cents ($174,52) per day. Lum- 
ber bore per superficial foot, at the Mills, a price of sixteen dollars per 
thousand. There were no other extensive Mills on the St. Johns to 
interfere with these, nor any other Mills at all except one or two little 
ones, with a single saw, or something of that kind. 

To the seventh Interrogatory on the part of Charles F. Sibbald, he 
answers : 

I have already stated the costs of the Mills. As respects the Pla- 
ning Machines, I understood in 1830, from Mr. Sibbald that he was 
about making an arrangement for Woodworth's Patent Planing Ma- 
chines, and I believe that the measures adopted by the Government 
prevented him from carrying it into effect. 

To the eighth Interrogatory on the part of Charles F. Sibbald, he 
answers : 

I believe the saving of the frieglit of the boards would have paid the 
cost of planing them. They were, that is planed boards, were then 
and are now worth from forty to forty-five dollars a thousand in Phi- 
ladelphia; unplaned boards about thirty dollars a thousand. I believe 
the saving of freight would be about one-fifth. Tlie average freight 
of rough boards was from nine to ten dollars a thousand. The cost 
of planing lumber with the Engines which the Mills were using would 
have been about two dollars a thousand. 

To the ninth Interrogatory on the part of Charles F. Sibbald, he 
answers : 

Mr. Sibbald dkl keep a store at Panama, and disposed there of 
goods to the amount of thirty or forty thousand dollars per annum; 
the profits were never less than fifty per cent, on the goods. The 
store was broken up by the proceedings of the Government. 

To the tenth Interrogatory on the part of Charles F. Sibbald, he 
answers : 

Mr. Sibbald did commence ship building, which I think would have 
been very profitable ; he had several vessels of his own engaged in the 
business of the Mills, besides a number of chartered vessels ; some of 
these were large; there were the ship John, two brigs, and one 
schooner ; these belonged to Mr. Sibbald, and besides there were a 
3 



18 

number of chartered vessels, brigs, schooners, and sloops. All his 
own vessels had to be sold afterwards for want of employment. 

To the eleventh Interrogatory on the part of Charles F. Sibbald, he 
answers : 

This trade was commenced under the Spanish flag in shipping flour 
to Havanna, which was sent out from Philadelphia, under the induce- 
ments of the Florida treaty. 

To the twelfth Interrogatory on the part of Charles F. Sibbald, he 
answers : 

Other business was carried on advantageously in purchasing cotton 
and timber contracts ; contracts made for hewn Pine timber cut by 
axes exclusively. 

To the thirteentli Interrogatory on the part of Charles F. Sibbald^ 
he answers : 

The business of Mr. Sibbald has been destroyed in its various 
branches, of which the details have been before mentioned, by the 
operations of the Government. The Mills passed out of the posses- 
sion of the proprietor, and have since gone to ruin, brought on by 
these means. They still continue in that ruinous condition. 

To the fourteenth Interrogatory on the part of Charles F. Sibbald, 
he answers : 

Mr. Sibbald had extensive credits with several houses in New York ; 
part of those credits were withdrawn in consequence of the course 
adopted against his Lands and Mills by the Officers of the United 
States. His credit did suffer, as a merchant, to a great extent on ac- 
count of these measures ; but his loss I cannot estimate. It affected 
him for several years. 

To the fifteenth Interrogatory on the part of Charles F. Sibbald, he 
answers : 

I know and have heard of no other cause for the destruction of Mr. 
Sibbald's business, but the conduct of the United States. 

CHARLES SNOWDEN. 

Sworn and subscribed on this 27th i 
day of May, 1837, before inc, ^ 

G. BARTRAM, Mdcrman. 

Taken in my presence, 

H. D. GILPIN, 

Attorney of the United States. 



(DOCUMENT A.) 

Estimate of the Expenses and Profits of two Steam Saw Mills, at. 
Panama, East Florida. 

Agent, - - - - - - $ 1000 

Engineer, - - - - - - 960 

Sawyer and Engineer, _ . . . 960 

Blacksmith, - - - - - - 3 GO 

Watchman, - - - - - - 200 

One Mill— 
12 Sawyers, 

2 Men to w^heel out saw dust, 
4 " to pile lumber, 
2 " fire, 
1 " cook, 

1 " in Blacksmith's Shop, 

2 Supernumeraries. 



24 



The otlier Mill— 
7 Sawyers, 

1 Man to wheel out saw dust, 
3 " to pile lumber, 

2 " fire, 

2 Supernumeraries. 

39 persons at $ 14 per month, is - - 6,552 

Diet of 44 persons, including black laborers, at 20 cents 

per day, - - - - - - 3,212 



13,244 

Interest, wear and tare, 5,500 

$18,744 



20 

Say 300 days, )$ 18,744 



62 48 
The two Mills cutting 20,000 feet of lumber per day, 

requiring 22,000 feet of logs, at $2 50 per M, is 55 00 



Estimate of the daily expenses of the Mills, including logs, $ 117 48 

15,000 feet of prime lumber, per day, at $ 16, = $240 
3,000 " second quality, " 12, 36 

2,000 " refuse, " 8, 16 292 



Profit per day, $ 1 74 52 



DEPOSITION OF JOHN GIBSON, 

Of the County of Philadelphia, Accountant, a Witness produced on 
the part of Charles F. Sibbald, and examined in the presence of the 
Attorney of the United States, at Pliiladelphia, on the tenth and 
twenty-first days of July, A. D. 1837, sworn and subscribed before 
Samuel Badger, Esq. an Alderman of the City of Philadelphia. 

To the first Interrogatory on the part of the United States, he 
answers : 

I know Charles F. Sibbald, and have been acquainted with him 
since the year eighteen hundred and twenty-six. I kept his books 
from the year eighteen hundred and twenty-seven, until the year eigh- 
teen hundred and twenty-nine, a period of about two years. Mr. Sib- 
bald had a grant from the Spanish Government of sixteen thousand 
acres of Land in Florida — four thousand acres of which grant was 
located in TurnbuU's Swamp. And this last mentioned tract, as I un- 
derstood from persons in Florida, whilst I was there as Mr. Sibbald's 
Agent, in eighteen hundred and thirty, was the finest quality of sugar 
land, and was very valuable, and contains a large quantity of Live Oak 
timber;— this is from hearsay, and not from personal knowledge, hav- 
ing never seen the tract myself. Another part of the grant, of ten 
thousand acres, was situated at Panama, on the St. Johns River, was 
thickly covered with Yellow Pine timber, of fine quality. There is 
not much value attached to Pine lands — it consists in the timber— ex- 
cept the location, which is valuable on account of the depth of water, 
the healthiness of the place, and the superiority of the harbor. I have 
been on the spot, and have seen this ten thousand acre tract. The 
remaining two thousand acres are situated at Alachua. From hearsay, 
having never seen it, this tract was also said to be first quality land, 
and to contain Live Oak timber. 

To the second Interrogatory on the part of the United States, he 
answers : 

Mr. Sibbald erected a Steam Saw Mill in eighteen hundred and 
twenty-seven, at Panama, on the teji thousand acre tract. This Mill 
was destroyed by fire in eighteen hundred and twenty-eight, after hav- 



22 

ing been in complete operation ; and in eighteen hundred and twenty- 
nine, Mr. Sibbald erected another Steam Saw Mill on the same spot, 
upon a very extensive scale ; and he erected another Steam Saw Mill 
in eighteen hundred and thirty. These Mills together were capable 
of sawing twenty thousand feet of lumber per day; they cost upwards 
of eighty thousand dollars. I do not know their power. They could 
operate about three hundred days in the year. The one erected in 
eighteen hundred and twenty-nine, was the largest: it worked eight 
gangs working forty-eight saws — the other Mill was calculated to 
work about half that number, and could saw about eight thousand feet 
of lumber per day. The large Mill could execute the remaining 
twelve thousand feet. I do not know the relative cost of each Mill. 
The cost mentioned of eighty thousand dollars, embraces, besides the 
Saw Mills, all the improvements at Panama, such as wharves, houses, 
store houses, out houses, and all necessary buildings, and all expendi- 
tures there. The buildings were merely appendages to the Mills ; and 
the Sa^v Mills themselves, with the machinery in them, made up the 
sum of eighty thousand dollars, within about two thousand dollars. — 
This knowledge was gained from keeping Mr. Sibbald's books at the 
time. I kept his books also in eighteen hundred and thirty. 

To the third Interrogatory on the part of the United States, he 
answers : 

All my knowledge on the subjects inquired about in this Interroga- 
tory is derived from keeping the books of Mr. Sibbald, and seeing his 
correspondence. Mr. Sibbald was virtually deprived of the use of his 
Lands and Mills in the year eighteen hundred and twenty-eight, twenty- 
nine, and thirty. I speak now of the four thousand and ten thousand 
acre tracts. I mean he had no use of the timber during the first two 
years, and was also, in eighteen hundred and thirty, deprived of the 
use of the Mills. He was forbidden to cut timber from both said tracts, 
consisting of Pine and Live Oak, by Wm. D. Acken, Esq., Agent of 
the Navy Department, and Thomas Douglass, U. States Attorney at 
St. Augustine, and John Rodman, Esq., Collector of the Customs at 
St. Augustine. I think I have spoken to Mr. Douglass about stopping 
Mr. Grice from taking the Live Oak timber — I have had no conversa- 
tion whatever on these subjects with Mr. Rodman or Mr. Acken. I 
know Mr. Rodman, but not Mr. Acken. The forbidding the cutting 
of timber was, as I heard, by Mr. Acken personally, and not by let- 
ter. Mr. Rodman's letter I have seen, but I cannot tell the date. I 
never saw any letter on the subject from Mr. Douglass. 



23 

To the fourth Interrogatory on the part of the United States, he 
answers : 

In eighteen hundred and thirty, the Mills and the tracts on which 
they were located, were taken possession of by Walter Smith, Esq., 
Marshal of the United States, and I believe they are so held until the 
present time. They were so held during a period of thirty months- 
whilst I resided in Florida. 

To the fifth Interrogatory on the part of the United States, he 
answers : 

The Steam Saw Mills and buildings have been entirely ruined, and 
have become a total loss, in consequence of his being dispossessed of 
them in eighteen hundred and thirty, by the Marshal ; and his being 
forbidden by the Officers of the United States to cut the timber on his 
Lands. The Steam Saw Mills being both in fact abandoned, were 
subject to pillage, and also to the natural decay in that climate. The 
out houses have gone to ruin, from the same cause. As to the Land 
and timber, I can say they would be injured for want of the necessary 
care to preserve them. 

To the sixth Interrogatory on the part of the United States, he 
answers : 

The business of sawing timber was considered very profitable at 
the time Mr. Sibbald's property was taken possession of, and his busi- 
ness broken up ; and is still considered as a profitable business. This 
is also my opinion, from knowing the costs of sawing, and the result 
of sales. In my opinion Mr. Sibbald sustained damage to the amount 
of one hundred and fifty dollars per day, in consequence of this inter- 
ference with his property. He abandoned his Mills, in consequence 
of their being taken possession of by the United States Marshal, as 
stated in my answer to the fourth Interrogatory. By the one hundred 
and fifty dollars per day, I mean to include only the loss on the ope- 
rations of the Mills. This would amount to the first day of June, one 
thousand eight hundred and thirty-seven, to three hundred and seventy- 
nine thousand one hundred and seventy dollars, including interest, 
which is calculated upon each year. The Avhole cost of the Mills, 
which, since my answer to the former Interrogatory, I have ascertain- 
ed to be eighty-two thousand one hundred and fifty-nine dollars and 
five cents, exclusive of interest, was also lost. I estimate the loss 
which Mr. Sibbald sustained from not being able to put in operation 



2^4 

the Planing Machines as contemplated by him, up to the present time, 
at two hundred thousand dollars. I mean to say the profits from them 
would have amounted to that sum. Mr. Sibbald sustained a loss from 
not being enabled to fulfil his contract wiih Mr. Grice for the cutting 
of Live Oak timber on his Lands ; the actual loss on that contract was 
sixteen thousand dollars. Mr. Sibbald had other private contracts, 
besides that with Mr. Grice, for Pine timber. I believe he sustained 
damage by reason of not being able to comply Avith them. The con- 
tracts for Pine timber were not extensive* Pine timber ought to be a 
profitable trade in Florida. He contemplated large contracts in Pine 
timber. Mr. Sibbald within the last two years had contracts with the 
Navy Department for Live Oak timber to nearly three hundred thou- 
sand dollars. I estimate the loss on these to be one hundred thousand 
dollars, being the amount of the forfeiture of the bonds in case of non- 
fulfilment — Mr. Sibbald having been prevented from cutting the tim- 
ber on his Land in Turnbull's Swamp. He went out there with ships 
and men. He sustained damage from failing to realize profits from 
the sales of store goods — these I estimate at seventy thousand dollars. 
1 know of no other losses, unless that arising from the loss of his com- 
mercial standing and credit. This is a kind of damage that cannot be 
very well estimated. It might be estimated at one hundred thousand 
dollars; such being the amount of Mr. Sibbald's engagements at the 
time. 

To the seventh Interrogatory on the part of the United States, he 
answers : 

The pi'operty did suffer depreciation, and has, as far as regards the 
Mills, become a total loss ; and it was not owing to any negligence or 
want of prudence and care on the part of said Sibbald, but to his be- 
ing deprived of it by the Officers of the Government. 

To the eighth Interrogatory on the part of the United States, he 
answers : 

Attachments were issued against Mr. Sibbald's Mills and property, 
during my Agency in Florida, upon claims arising from hire of hands 
and sums due to workmen, in consequence of embarrassments caused 
by the acts of the Government. 

To the ninth Interrogatory on the part of the United States, he 
answers : 

He knows nothing in answer to this Interrogatory, except what has 
already been stated by him. 



25 

To the tenth Interrogatory on the part of tlie United States, he 
answers : 

At the time Mr. Sibbald suspended payment in Pliiladelphia, in 
June, eighteen hundred and thirty, I was his Agent at Panama, and I 
witnessed the successful operation of the Mills. The whole amount 
of payments which were then due, or which would have become due 
for four months after his suspension, amounted to six thousand dollars, 
exclusive of notes, which were understood to be renewed until the 
funds were realized from his business. The interference of the Gov- 
ernment in preventing him from cutting his timber, and possessing his 
Lands, deprived him of his resources as follows: first, the amount of 
the contract with Mr. Grice, sixteen thousand dollars, the sum to be 
actually paid in cash per contract; second, the withdrawal of the loan 
of fifteen thousand dollars, by Joseph E. Bloomfield, of New York, 
which loan was predicated on Mr. Sibbuld's contract with Mr. Grice ;• 
third, the operations of the Mills ; fourth, the withdrawal of fifteen 
thousand dollars by Sturges Si Perkins, of New York, predicated 
upon Mr. Sibbald's operations in Florida. He was deprived of fur- 
ther resources and money arrangements he might have affected from 
the great value of the five thousand acres of land particularly adapted 
to the culture of sugar, and said to be worth ten dollars per acre, ex- 
elusive of the value of the Live Oak timber on it, of which there was 
a large quantity. He was deprived of all these resources by the direct 
interference of the Ofiicers and Agents of the Government of the Uni- 
ted States, as already stated, with his Mills and Lands. I went out 
to Florida in May, eighteen hundred and thirty, and returned to Phi- 
ladelphia m July, eighteen hundred and thirty-three. 

JOHN GIBSON. 

•i . 

To the first Interrogatory, and also to the second, third, fourth, and 
fifth Interrogatories on the part of Charles F. Sibbald, he answers : 

He knows nothing in answer to these Interrogatories, except what 
he has already stated in his answer to the Interrogatories in chief. 

To the sixth Interrogatory on the part of Charles F. Sibbald, he 
answers : 

I believe Mr. Sibbald had peaceable possession of his property in 
Florida from eiglitccn hundred and sixteen, until the interference of 
the Government in eighteen hundred and twenty-eight. This is from 
4 



26 

hearsay. The Mills were in complete operation, and they were sus- 
ceptible of profitable and prosperous operation. The price of lumber 
at the Mills, was sixteen dollars per thousand superficial feet. There 
were no other extensive Mills at that time on the St. Johns River, or 
any other River in that country. I have no other knowledge of the 
matters interrogated about in this Interrogatory, except as I have 
already stated. 

To the seventh Interrogatory on the part of Charles F. Sibbald, he 
answei's : 

He has no knowledge of what is therein interrogated about, except 
as he has already stated in his former answer. 

To the eighth Interrogatory on the part of Charles F. Sibbald, he 
answers : 

The cost of planing lumber, exclusive of the power derived from 
the Mills, would have been that of two additional hands to each Pla- 
ning Machine. The price of planed flooring boards in Philadelphia 
was, and is, from forty to forty-five dollars per thousand superficial 
feet. The price of unplaned flooring boards at the same place was, 
and is, about thirty dollars. The saving of freight in favor of planed 
boards is about one-fifth. Each Planing Machine is capable of pla- 
ning six thousand feet per day. 

To the ninth Interrogatory on the part of Charles F. Sibbald, he 
answers : 

Said Sibbald did keep a store for the sale of goods at Panama, and 
he could dispose of from twenty to thirty thousand dollars per annum, 
and the amount of profits were about fifty per cent, or ten thousand 
dollars. 

To the tenth Interrogatory on the part of Charles F. Sibbald, he 
answers : 

Mr. Sibbald had made arrangements for building vessels at Panama. 
He actually commenced building a brig — and with a view of carrying 
on the business of ship building, he had selected Mr. Samuel S. Pear- 
son, (who is since dead) of Southwark, an experienced ship builder, 
who went out there as his first Agent, and commenced the brig spo- 



'Z4 

ken of above. The business could have been advantageously and 
profitably carried on, having the timber on the spot. He had several 
vessels of his own engaged in the business of the Mills : they were 
sold at Philadelphia, at a sacrifice, he being compelled to abandon 
the business. He employed a number of chartered vessels, and the 
operations of the Mills would have required a vessel eveiy few 
days. 

To the eleventh Interrogatory on the part of Charles F. Sibbald, he 
answers : 

Mr. Sibbald had commenced the business of shipping flour from 
Philadelphia to Panama, and thence under the Spanish flag to Havan- 
na, and the operation was induced by a special clause in the Florida 
Treaty, and the operations of this kind were actually begun. 

To the twelfth Interrogatory on the part of Charles F. Sibbald, he 
answers : 

He purchased Sea Island cotton advantageously, as connected with 
the store business, and had made contracts for timber cut by axes, ex- 
clusively of the business of the Mills. 

To the thirteenth Interrogatory on the part of Charles F. Sibbald, 
he answers : 

He knows nothing in relation to this Interrogatory except what he 
has already stated. 

To the fourteenth Interrogatory on the part of Charles F. Sibbald, 
he answers : 

There were other houses in New York, besides those already 
named by me, with whom Mr. Sibbald enjoyed extensive credits, 
which were withdrawn in consequence of the interference of the 
authorities or Officers of the Government of the United States, as 
aforesaid. These measures have continued to operate against his 
business pursuits as a Merchant, in the City of Philadelphia, from the 
year eighteen hundred and twenty-eight, up to the present time. He 
has no other knowledge of the other matter inquired about in this In- 
terrogatory, except as he has already stated. 



28 

To the fifteenth Interrogator)^ on the part of Cliarles F. Sibbakl, 
he answers : 

I believe the destruction of the business of Mr. Sibbald arose exclu- 
sively from the interference of the Agents or Officers of the Govern- 
ment of the United States. 



JOHN GIBSON. 



Sworn and subscribed on this 21st day ) 
of July, A. D. 1837, before me, I 



S. BADGER. 



DEPOSITION OF SAMUEL GRICE, 

Of the County of Philadelphia, Ship Builder, a Witness produced on 
the part of Charles F, Sibbald, and examined in the presence of the 
Attorney of the United States, at Philadelphia, on the seventeenth 
day of July, A. D. 1837, affirmed and subscribed before Peter 
Hay, Esq., an Alderman of the City of Philadelphia. 

To the tirst Interrogatory on the part of the United States, he 
answers : 

I know Charles F. Sibbald, and have known him since eighteen 
hundred and twenty-seven. I have been on a part of his Lands in 
Florida, and they are of a good quality, and I know the quantity and 
quality of the timber thereon. 

To the second Interrogatory on the part of the United States, he 
answers : 

There were no Saw Mills erected on the Lands I saw. I under- 
stood there were Saw Mills erected on the part of the Lands which I 
did not see ; I cannot say as to the power, but it was extensive. There 
were three Saw Mills, which from an exhibition of Mr. Sibbald's 
books, made to me some time ago, cost rising of eighty thousand dol- 
lars. The Mills would cut about twenty thousand feet per day, from 
my knowledge of other Mills of a similar capacity. A Saw Mill ought 
to average about five days per week ; allowing one day per week for 
stoppages, or repairs. 

To the third Interrogatory on the part of the United States, he 
answers : 

The said Sibbald was dispossessed of the Live Oak Lands that I 
have been on myself, in Mosqueto County, in East Florida, from the 
year eighteen hundred and twenty-seven ; and I have no knowledge 
that he is possessed of them yet. This was done by an Agent of the 
Government of the United States, Wm. D. Acken. He was prevented 
from cutting Live Oak timber from the said Lands by this Agent. 



30 

To the fourtli Interrogatory on tlie part of the United States, he 
answers : 

I know of no one who had possession of these Lands except the 
Government Agent. I understood from the Deputy Marshal, Samuel 
Blair, that he had possession of the Mills — he had levied upon them. 
This was some time in 1828, 1829, or 1830, that I heard this, and I 
have no knowledge of their being returned to Mr. Sibbald since. 

To the fifth Interrogatory on the part of the United States, he 
answers : 

I have no personal knowledge of the injuries sustained by the Mills, 
but in the year eighteen hundred and thirty-one, when I was at ^. 
Augustine, my intention was to go to the Mills, expecting to make 
some arrangement about them with Mr. Sibbald, when he came into 
possession of them. I was informed by several persons direct from 
there, that they were so much dilapidated that it would be cheaper to 
erect new Mills. Upon further recollection, this might have been a 
year or two later than the year I have mentioned. 

To the sixth Interrogatory on the part of the United States, he 
answers : 

The sawing of timber was a profitable business at the time referred 
to in this Interrogatory, and sales of timber were at that time easily 
effected to any extent. Allowing the Mills not to have been burnt 
down during the time he was dispossessed, his damage up to this time 
would, in my opinion, be five hundred thousand dollars. I speak of 
all his damage. He relinquished the possession of the Mills, they 
being taken possession of by the United States Marshal ; but he never 
abandoned the hope of eventual recovery. 

To the seventh Interrogatory on the part of the United States, he 
answers : 

The property evidently sutlered depreciation, and to a great extent. 
I do not know of any actual destruction. I do not think that any part 
of such depreciation was owing to negligence, or want of prudence or 
care, on the part of said Sibbald. 

To the eighth Interrogatory on the part of the United States, he 
answers : 

I understood his property to have been attached by the workmen 
at the Mills, in consequence of the action of the Agent of the Govern- 



31 

nient in preventing him from using his property. His embarrassments 
were brought on by that; that was my impression at the time, and 
has been so since. 

To the ninth Interrogatory on the part of the United States, he 
answers : 

Said Sibbald was deprived of the benefit of a contract with me by 
the interference referred to in this Interrogatory. I had a contract 
with him in eighteen hundred and twenty-seven, with the privilege of 
cutting Live Oak timber to the extent of one hundred thousand cubic 
feet. If the contract could have been carried into effect without inter- 
ruption, and we had cut the one hundred thousand feet, I should have 
paid him about sixteen thousand dollars. No part of this money was 
paid. A copy of this contract is hereto annexed, marked (A) S. G.) 
and made part of this answer. I do not know of any other contracts, 
except one made in eighteen hundred and thirty-five, for Live Oak 
timber, with the Navy Department. 

To the tenth Interrogatory on the part of the United States, he 
answers : 

I know nothing of the matter inquired about in this Interrogatory, 
except as I am about to reply to the Interrogatories on the part of 
Charles F. Sibbald. 

SAMUEL GRICE. 

To the first Interrogatory on the part of Charles F. Sibbald, he 
answers : 

I have already answered the matter herein interrogated about. 

To the second Interrogatory on the part of Charles F. Sibbald, he 
answers : 

I have no personal knowledge of the Mills referred to in this Inter- 
rogatory. I have no doubt of the existence and power of these Mills, 
having received my information from the Agents of Mr. Sibbald, and 
other persons. 

To the third Interrogatory on the part of Charles F. Sibbald, he 
answers : 

Mr. Sibbald possessed peculiar advantages for carrying on the Mills, 
by having good Pine timber Land attached, by means of which the 



32 

said Mills might be advantageously supplied. He had other Lands ili 
Florida, which were in Mosqueto County. These were the Live Oak 
Lands already spoken of, and were well adapted to the culture of su- 
gar, and were of good quality. The principal growth of timber on 
these Lands is Live Oak: there is also Red Cedar, which is valuable, 
being such Cedar as they used to send to England for boxes and pen- 
cils, and well adapted for coffins also. I have heard the situation of 
the Mills was healthy, and that it was possessed of advantages for 
business at all seasons of the year. 

To the fourth Interrogatory on the part of Charles F. Sibbald, he 
answers : 

I had a heavy contract with the Navy Department for Live Oak 
timber, and I contracted with Mr. Sibbald, as I have before stated, for 
the timber; and in the fall of eighteen hundred and twenty-seven, sent 
my brother, with a gang of twenty or thirty hands, to Mr. Sibbald's 
Lands in Florida; and having found them, he was notified by Mr. 
Acken, the United States Agent, who forbid us from cutting timber on 
this Land, and the object then was abandoned. I think when I was 
out in eighteen hundred and thirty, I was told by Mr. Rodman, the 
Collector of St. Augustine, or Mr. Douglass, the District Attorney, 
that we could not cut the timber on the Lands, under pain of fine and 
imprisonment, until the thing was settled. 

To the fifth Interrogatory on the part of Charles F. Sibbald, he 
answers : 

In addition to the answers already given to the inquiries herein 
contained, Mr. Sibbald was under the liabilities contained in the con- 
tract with me already adverted to. 

To the sixth Interrogatory on the part of Charles F. Sibbald, he 
answers : 

I have no knowledge of the time that Mr. Sibbald may have been 
in possession of the property. I understood the Mills were put into 
operation, and I have no doubt they were susceptible of prosperous 
and profitable operation. I have no knowledge of what price the tim- 
ber sold for at the Mills, and cannot say what profits per day could be 
made. By comparison with the profits of Governor Bennett's Steam 
Saw Mill at Charleston, South Carolina, of the last year, the profits 
would have been three hundred dollars per day, or seventy-five thou- 



33 

sand dollars per annum : this supposes an absence from accident, and 
a similarity of prices of timber and sales. I never heard of any other 
Mills on the St. Johns River. 

To the seventh Interrogatory on the part of Charles F. Sibbald, he 
answers : 

I have no knowledge of the matter inquired about in this Interroga- 
tory, except as I have already stated. 

To the eighth Interrogatory on the part of Charles F. Sibbald, he 
answers : 

The price of planed flooring boards in Philadelphia, about five 
years ago, was forty dollars per thousand feet. The price of unplaned 
flooring boards, at that time and place, was from twenty-eight to thirty 
dollars : I speak of the same quality. There is a diflereuce between 
the freight of planed and unplaned flooring boards, but I do not know 
what it is. I have no knowledge of the other matters inquired about 
in this Interrogatory. 

To the ninth Interrogatory on the part of Charles F. Sibbald, he 
answers : 

I have no personal knowledge of the matter inquired about in this 
Interrogatory. 

To the tenth Interrogatory on the part of Charles F. Sibbald, he 
answers : 

I have no knowledge of the matter inquired about in this Interroga- 
tory, except that I saw some copper in his compting-house in Phila- 
delphia, which he informed me was to be used in ship building, in 
Florida. 

To the eleventh Interrogatory on the part of Charles F. Sibbald, he 
answers : 

I have no personal knowledge of the matter inquired about in this 
Interrogatory. 

To the twelfth, thirteenth and fourteenth Interrogatories on the part 
of Charles F. Sibbald, he answers : 

I have no additional knowledge, except that the business of the said 
Charles F. Sibbald was destroyed in its various branches and details, 



34 

by being dispossessed of his property in the manner aforesaid. With 
Mr. Joseph E. Bloomfiekl, of New York, Mr. Sibbald had an exten- 
sive credit, which he withdrew on finding Mr. Sibbald so much crip- 
pled in his efforts to get possession of his property in Florida. He 
has certainly sustained a heavy loss in the destruction of his commer- 
cial credit, and the continued embarrassments from eighteen hundred 
and twenty-seven, up to the present time. 

To the fifteenth InteiTOgatory on the part of Charles F. Sibbald, he 
answers : 

I do not know or believe that any other cause existed for the de- 
struction of the business of the said Charles F. Sibbald, except the 
interposition of the Officers and Agents of the United States, as afore- 
said. 

SAMUEL GRICE. 

Affirmed and subscribed before me, t 
this 17th day of July, A. D. 1837, \ 

PETER HAY, Alderman. 



DOCUMENT (A) S. G.) 

This Agreement made and concluded this 12th day of October, A. D. 
1827, between Samuel Grice and Charles F, Sibbald, both of the 
City of Philadelphia, and State of Pennsylvania, witnesseth, 

That whereas the Spanish Government did in the year A. D. 1816, 
concede unto Charles F. Sibbald, a grant of Land in East Florida, 
now the Territory of Florida, containing four thousand acres, which is 
surveyed in what is known there as TurnbuU's Swamp, — which said 
four thousand acres is said to be covered with Live Oak timber ; and 
whereas the said Samuel Gi'ice now has a certain contract with the 
Government of the United States for a set of Live Oak frames ; to wit, 
one for a seventy-four gun ship — one for a forty-four gun ship— and 
one for a twenty gun ship — making three entire frames of Live Oak, 
and in quantity about seventy thousand cubical feet ; and said S. Grice 
being desirous to avail himself of said timber to execute said contract ; 
now, it is this day agreed between the said parties, that the said 
Charles F. Sibbald doth sell and dispose of to the said Samuel Grice, 
so much of the Live Oak on three thousand acres of the above pre- 
mises, (one thousand acres being already disposed of) as shall be ne- 
cessary or required to complete the three entire frames of ships above 
mentioned, at (16 cts.) say sixteen cents per cubical foot for mould 
timber — and the said Charles F. Sibbald, further grants the privilege 
of cutting roads, building houses, and entering into the said premises 
in any manner that may be requisite for the fulfilment and execution of 
this agreement, and further agrees to hold harmless the said Samuel 
Grice, from any difficulty that may arise from any conflicting claim 
to the said Land ; and the said Samuel Grice hereby agrees to cut, or 
cause to be cut, any Live Oak which can be used in the said three 
frames, and to pay for the same, at the price before mentioned on the 
delivery of each cargo at its port of destination. 

It is further understood, that Charles F. Sibbald shall have the be- 
nefit of all improvements made on the said premises, such as houses, 
stores, &c. there ei-ected, and which shall become his property provi- 
ded the cutting of the said timber shall occupy at least the ensuing 
season. 



36 

For the true performance of this agreement the parties do bind 
themselves, each in the penal sum of one thousand dollars. In Wit- 
ness whereof, the parties have hereunto interchangeably set their 
hands and seals, the day and year first above written. 

SAMUEL GRICE, f^^bt 

CHARLES F. SIBBALD, IIea *J 



Witness present — 

.TOHN GIBSON, 
CORNELIUS TIERS 



i 



Whereas the undersigned, Charles F. Sibbald and Samuel Grice, 
did, on the 12th October, 1827, enter into an agreement, whereby the 
said Sibbald, for the consideration mentioned tlierein, did sell to said 
Grice the Live Oak on his Land in Florida ; and whereas it was found 
impracticable to obtain the said timber the past season, in consequence 
of diffiulties not anticipated by either party, thus subjecting the said 
Grice to serious inconveniences and loss, and the said Sibbald to in- 
convenience in not receiving funds for the timber as anticipated by the 
contracts, and whereas the said Sibbald is desirous of raising funds on 
the timber as above mentioned, which the said Grice is willing to as- 
sist in, on terms of mutual reciprocity. Therefore, this agreement wit- 
nesseth, that the said Grice agrees to advance his notes to the said 
Sibbald, to amount of dollars, to be renewed 

by him, until Grice shall be in receipt of timber to amount thereof, 
in consideration of which, Sibbald agrees that in addition to the tim- 
ber sold Grice, as per original contract, he is to be at liberty to take 
any additional timber he may want for mould timber, at the specified 
price of sixteen cents per foot cubic, and promiscuous timber at ten 
cents, and the smaller timber, less than that required for the Navy, at 
eight cents per cubic foot, the whole amount not to exceed one hun- 
lired thousand cubic feet. 

SAMUEL GRICE, tj|i^| 

CHARLES F. SIBBALD. Jsea* J 

Philadelphia, April Sd, 1828. 



37 



Whereas a certain agreement for the sale of Live Oak timber, situa- 
ted in Turnbull's Swamp, East Florida, Avas made and entered into 
on the 12th day of October, A. D. 1827, between Samuel Grice and 
Charles F. Sibbald, of Philadelphia, and whereas the said agreement 
was extended on the 3d day of April last, now it is further imderstood 
and agreed to between the said parties, that three years shall be the 
time limited to cut the Live Oak embraced in said agreement ; that du- 
ring the ensuing fall and winter, the greater part of the hands now 
contemplated to be sent out by the said Grice, shall be located to cut 
on said tract, and it is further understood and agreed by the parties to 
said agreement, that they bind themselves each to the other, their 
heirs, executors, administrators and assigns, for the true and faithful 
performance thereof, in the penal sum of three thousand dollars. 

Witness our hands and seals at Philadelphia, this thirteenth day of 
May, A. D. 1828. 

SAMUEL GRICE, -j^seal^ 



CHARLES F. SIBBALD. 11***1 



V V V V V*3J* 



Witness present — 

GEORGE BERIMAN, > 
JOHN EVIL. i 



DEPOSITION OF PETER R. WALKER, 

Of the City of Camden, in the State of New Jersey, Millwright and 
Engineer, a Witness produced on the part of Charles F. Sibbald, 
and examined in the presence of the Attorney of the United States, 
on the 26th day of July, A. D. 1837, sworn and subscribed before 
Peter Hay, an Alderman of the City of Philadelphia. 

To the first Interrogatory on the part of the United States, he 
answers : 

I am acquainted with Charles F. Sibbald, and have a knowledge of 
Lands said to be his in Florida, having been on some of them. The 
part with which I was acquainted is situated on St. Johns River, on 
the peninsula formed by its junction with Trout Creek. I know the 
quality of the Lands, and also the quantity and quality of the timber 
Ihereon. It consists principally of Pine barrens, interspersed with 
hammocks, containing Live Oak, Bay- Wood, and other timber com- 
mon to the country. The timber was as to the quantity about the 
common average. There w^ere different species of Pine on the soil, 
some of first rate quality, and others of inferior qualities. The Pine 
barrens are sometimes very productive Lands, by being manured and 
properly cultivated. I am not acquainted with Mr. Sibbald's other 
Lands in Florida, only from hearsay. 

To the second Interrogatory on the part of the United States, he 
answers : 

Saw Mills were erected on the Lands spoken of, to wit : two Steam 
Saw Mills finished, and one Steam Saw Mill in the course of being 
completed, and one Water Saw Mill, which appeared to be completed, 
but I did not see it in operation. This Water Mill was some miles 
from the Steam Saw Mills, but I did not see it in operation. The 
largest Steam Saw Mill had an Engine between fifty and sixty horse 
power. The other Mill must have had an Engine of between twenty 
and thirty horse power. The unfinished Mill was calculated for a 
larger Engine than the smaller Mill, which was the first built. I 
should think, taking all the contingencies into consideration, that the 



30 

three Steam Saw Mills cost about eighty thousand dollars — that is, 
taking all the improvements of the place together. The Mill which 
I have spoken of as being between twenty and thirty horse power, 
was burnt down, and was the one which had been first built. The 
unfinished Mill spoken of was to supply its place. The two large 
Mills were capable of cutting twenty thousand superficial feet of tim- 
ber per day, but one of them we had not in operation. It could have 
been completed in a couple of months, if Ave had had the materials 
there. The last Mill was not finished, being taken possession of by 
the Marshal of the United States. To go to the extent they could 
work three hundred days in the year. 

To the third Interrogatory on the part of the United States, he 
answers : 

He was dispossessed of the moveable property in the Mills, and in 
the Store, and on the premises attached to the Mills, by the Marshal 
of the United States, under attachments taken out by the workmen, 
myself, and others. This was in the year eighteen hundred and thir- 
ty. We understood that Mr. Sibbald had failed, and we took out 
these attachments to secure ourselves. Previous to my going there 
in eighteen hundred and thirty, I had understood that Mr. Sibbald 
could not cut the timber off his Lands, being forbidden by the Officers 
of the United States. I went there in May, eighteen hundred and 
thirty, and continued there until the Mills ceased in August of the 
same year. I left there in September. We got the timber from tran- 
sient people, from rafts, as we could not cut any on Mr. Sibbald's 
Lands. Further this deponent knows nothing in answer to this In- 
terrogatory. 

To the fourth Interrogatory on the part of the United States, he 
answers : 

I cannot say for how long a time said Sibbald was dispossessed or 
deprived of the use of his timber Lands and Mills, previous to the 
year eighteen hundred and thirty, nor who had possession of them, 
except as I have before stated. 

To the fifth Interrogatory on the part of the United States, he 
answers : 

The Mills were materially injured by rust of the machinery, and 
corruption of the wood. I was there in eighteen hundred and thirty- 
two or three, and went and looked at the spot, and Ibund it had gone 



40 

to decay very much : upon further recollection, this was in Mai'clV, 
eighteen hundred and thirty-four. The injury to the Land or timber, 
was, that he could not have the use of the timber. 

To the sixth Interrogatory on the part of the United States, he 
answers : 

The sawing of timber was a profitable business at the time of Mr. 
Sibbald's property being taken possession of in eighteen hundred and 
thirty, as I have before stated, and his business broken up. As fast as 
timber could be sawed it brought sixteen dollars per thousand superfi- 
cial feet at the Mills. I have made an estimate of what the two Steam 
Saw Mills would have produced if both were in operation, but there 
was only one of them in operation. The expenses of the two Mills 
would have been as follows : 

One Engineer at nine hundred and sixty dollars per annum.' 

One Agent at one thousand dollars per annum. 

One other Engineer and Millwright at nine hundred and sixty dol- 
lars per annum. 

One Blacksmith at three hundred and sixty dollars per annum. 

Watchman at two hu.ndred dollars per annum. 

At the large Mill there were twelve sawyers, two men to wheel out 
saw dust, four to pile the lumber after it was sawed, two firemen, one 
cook, one helper in the Blacksmith's shop, two supernumeraries — at 
the other Mill that we were building, and was preparing to go into 
operation, it would require in addition seven sawyers, one man to 
wheel out saw dust, three to pile lumber, two firemen, two supernu- 
meraries. These persons in all amount to thirty-nine, which it would 
have taken to conduct both those Mills, at an average of fourteen dol- 
lars per month, which amounts to six thousand five hundred and fifty- 
two dollars per year. The whole forty-four persons would be found 
by Mr. Sibbald, in addition to wages, and I estimate they would cost 
twenty-five cents per day per head, or four thousand and fifteen dol- 
lars per year. The interest, wear and tare, would amount to fifty-five 
hundred dollars per annum. The total expenses would thus be nine- 
teen thousand five hundred and eighty-seven dollars per annum. The 
two Mills would cut twenty thousand feet of lumber per day, requiring 
twenty-two thousand feet of logs fully. I do not know actually what 
Mr. Sibbald gave for his logs. If they were got from Mr. Sibbald's 
own Lauds the logs would cost two dollars and fifty cents per thousand 
feet, — this would make fifty-five dollars. These calculations are made 
upon the supposition that there would be no extraordinary breaking 



41 

down. It is possible for Mills to run three hundred days in the year, 
which would make the above daily expenses of hands, &c. sixty-five 
dollars and twentj^-nine cents, to whicli there is to be added fifty-five 
dollars for logs, making the whole expense per day one hundred and 
twenty dollars and twenty-nine cents. Of the twenty thousand feet 
of lumber sawed, fifteen thousand would be of prime quality, worth 
sixteen dollars per thousand ; three thousand feet would be second 
quality, at twelve dollars per thousand feet ; and two thousand feet of 
refuse at eight dollars per thousand feet, making two hundred and 
ninety-two dollars, the produce of both Mills per day ; from which de- 
ducting the expenses as above, one hundred and twenty dollars and 
twenty-nine cents, would leave a clear nett gain of one hundred and 
seventy-one dollars and seventy-one cents per day. I cannot state 
further as to the damage sustained by Mr. Sibbald as inquired about 
in this Interrogatory. I understood that he had failed, and I under- 
stood he had been prevented from cutting his timber, and that may 
have been a great cause of his embarrassment, — and to this Interroga- 
tory he cannot further answer than he has already stated. 

To the seventh Interrogatory on the part of the United States, he 
answers : 

The depreciation was not owing to negligence or want of prudence 
and care on the part of Mr. Sibbald, whilst he was in possession of 
the property. The depreciation took place after he was dispossessed 
as aforesaid. To the remaining part of this Interrogatory he says he 
knows nothing, but what he has already stated in his answer to the 
former Interrogatories. 

To the eighth Interrogatory on the part of the United States, he 
answers : 

I cannot answer further to this Interrogatory than I have already 
stated in my answers to the former Interrogatories. 

To the ninth Interrogatory on the part of the United States, he 
answers : 

I have no knowledge of the matter interrogated about in this Inter- 
rogatory. 

6 



42 

To the tenth Interrogatory on the part of the United States, he' 
answers : 

I know or believe no other matter or thing as inquired about in this 
Interrogatory, except so far as I shall answer to the Interrogatories on- 
the part of Mr. Sibbald. 

PETER R. WALKER. 

To the first Interrogatory on the part of Charles F. Sibbald, he 
answers : 

I have been acquainted with Charles F. Sibbald since one thousand 
eight hundi'ed and twenty-seven. 

To the second Interrogatory on the part of Charles F. Sibbald, he 
answers : 

My knowledge of the Panama Steam Saw Mills erected by Mr. 
Sibbald on the River St. Johns, in East Florida, at its junction with 
the River St. George, or Trout Creek, arose from my being employ- 
ed there as Millwright and Engineer. The Mill that was burnt had 
one gang of saws and two single saws. The large Mill had four dou- 
ble gangs and carried eight logs through. The Mill that was about 
going into operation would have had, I think, two gangs and two sin- 
gle saws. The residue of this Interrogatory I have already answered 
in reply to the Interrogatories on the part of the United States. I have 
driven forty-eight saws in the large Mill. 

To the third Interrogatory on the part of Charles F. Sibbald, he 
answers : 

He has a good locality for his Mills — as good as any in that coun- 
try. There was timber of his own on this tract by which his Mills 
might have been supplied advantageously. The place Avhere said 
Mills were erected was very healthy, and it was possessed of advan- 
tages for business at all seasons of the year, being never closed by ice 
or interfered with by drought. As to the residue of this Interrogatory, 
he answers, I know nothing except what I have already stated in 
answer to the former Interrogatories. 

To the fourth and fifth Interrogatories on the part of Charles F. 
Sibbald, he answers: 

I know nothing of the matter herein interrogated about, except as 
I have already stated in my answers to former Interrogatories. 



43 

To the sixth Interrogatory on the part of Chai-les F. Sibbald, he 
answers : 

Mr. Sibbald was in peaceable possession of the property in eigh- 
teen hundred and twenty-eight— we cut some timber then. How long 
he had been in peaceable enjoyment of it I cannot say. The Mill that 
was burnt was put fully into operation in the beginning of eighteen 
hundred and twenty-eight ; I went out to finish her. In eighteen hun- 
dred and thirty, the large Mill was in operation, I went out there to 
remedy some defects in the machinery, which I did. There was no 
other extensive Mills on St. Johns River that I know of. The last 
Mill was within two months of going into operation, and the Steam 
Engine was ready for her at Messrs. Rush &, Muhlenburg's, in Phi- 
ladelphia, and the mechanics were on the spot ready to put it up, and 
there was an Engineer there to run her. As to the residue of this In- 
terrogatory, I cannot answer further than I have already stated. 

To the seventh Interrogatory on the part of Charles F. Sibbald, he 
answers : 

Between eighteen hundred and twenty-seven, and eighteen hundred 
and thirty, Mr. Sibbald asked me if Woodworth's Planing Machines 
could be used at the Mills, and I told him two could be used at the 
large Mill. I do not know of any arrangements for the use of them. 
As to the residue of this Interrogatory, he cannot answer further than 
he has already stated. 

To the eighth Interrogatory on the part of Charles F. Sibbald, he 
answers : 

The cost of planing lumber with the same Engine in the large Mill 
would have been two extra hands. I suppose the difference between 
planed and unplaned boards in freight would be a quarter or a fifth in 
favor of planed boards ; and as to the residue of this Interrogatory he 
knows nothing. 

To the ninth Interrogatory on the part of Charles F. Sibbald, he 
answers : 

Mr. Sibbald kept a store for the sale of goods, at Panama. He 
could dispose of a good many goods, but what amount per annum I 
cannot say, or what were the annual profits upon sucli sales. 



44 

To tlie tenth Interrogatory on the part of Charles F. Sibbald, he 
answers : 

Arrangements were made for building a brig at Panama ; and I un- 
derstood from Mr. Pearson, (since deceased) who was, I believe, 
something of a partner, that it was intended to build vessels there. 
There was a drafting loft over the Saw Mill, and I should suppose 
that nothing could prevent such business being profitably carried on 
at that place. There is no better timber for frames than is to be had 
there. Mr. Sibbald had vessels of his own engaged in the business of 
the Mills ; what became of them I do not know. He had also char- 
tered vessels so engaged. He owned a ship John — and there were a 
good many there, brigs and schooners of different kinds ; cannot tell 
exactly the number now. 

To the eleventh Interrogatory on the part of Charles F. Sibbald, he 
answers : 

I know nothing. 

To the twelfth Interrogatory on the part of Charles F. Sibbald, he 
answers : 

Mr. Sibbald purchased Sea Island cotton, and traded with it. To 
the residue of this Interrogatory he cannot answer. 

To the thirteenth, fourteenth, and fifteenth Interrogatories on the 
part of Charles F. Sibbald, he answers : 

I know nothing about the matters inquired about in these Interrog- 
atories, except what I have already stated in answer to the former In- 
terrogatories. 

PETER R. WALKER. 



Sworn and subscribed before me, this 
96tli day of July, A. D. 1837, 



PETER HAY, Alderman. 



DEPOSITION OF WILLIAM CARLYLE, 

Of the County of Philadelphia, Millwright and Pattern Maker, a Wit- 
ness produced on the part of Charles F. Sibbald, and examined in 
the presence of the Attorney of the United States at Philadelphia, 
on the twenty-eighth day of June, A. D. 1837, affirmed and sub- 
scribed before S. Badger, an Alderman of the City of Philadelphia. 

To the first Interrogatory on the part of the United States, he 
answers : 

I am acquainted with Charles F. Sibbald, and have seen Lands said 
to be his, on Trout Creek and the River St. Johns, in Florida. It 
was generally Pine Land, with Live Oak hammocks on it. The Land 
was not of good quality for cultivation, except the Live Oak ham- 
mocks. The timber was some large, and some of smaller quality, but 
generally of good quality. I have understood from general report, and 
from Mr. Sibbald's Agents out there, that he had also Lands on Mos- 
queto River, which were generally Live Oak Lands. 

To the second Interrogatory on the part of the United States, he 
answers : 

I went out to Panama in the fall of eighteen hundred and twenty- 
eight, and found the ruins of a Steam Saw Mill which had been burnt 
down. I cleared the ruins away, and, as Engineer employed by Mr. 
Sibbald, I erected another Steam Saw Mill on the same site. About 
a year after this, the building for another Mill was put up. The Mill 
that I put up in the place of the one burned down was between forty 
and fifty horse power — and not to exceed fifty. I have seen the En- 
gine intended for the Mill which was being erected : I saw it in Phi- 
ladelphia, and it now runs the Planing Machines at the corner of Arch 
and Broad streets, in this city. It was about ten horse power less than 
the other, making it not to exceed forty horse pov/er. I cannot say 
at what I should estimate the cost of both the Mills — I never made 
any estimate. I have sawed between sixteen and seventeen thousand 
superficial feet of timber with the one Mill ft-om day-light to dark — 
tliis would depend much upon the quality of the timber we had to 



46 

saw. The other Mill could cut in proportion, one-fifth less. This 
was of course a good day's work ; sometimes we could not do so 
much. I could cut thirty-two thousand feet of square lumber for ship 
plank per day : this would require more hands. We sawed generally 
small scantling, three by three, four by four, five by five, when we 
cut the largest quantity. I should suppose these Mills could be ope- 
rated three hundred days, if no accidents. I did not cut any ship 
plank whilst there. 

To the third Interrogatory on the part of the United States, he 
answers ; 

He was not dispossessed of his Lands or Mills whilst I was there, 
except so far as being prevented from cutting his timber, by Mr. 
Acken. I have frequently seen Mr. Acken there, and he has forbid- 
den Capt. Snowden, the Agent of Mr. Sibbald, from cutting Live Oak, 
and I think also Pine. He was prevented in no other way than being 
forbidden. They were allowed to cut Pine timber for fencing and 
building on the Land. I understood Mr. Acken was an Agent of the 
United States. 

To the fourth Interrogatory on the part of the United States, he 
answers : 

He was deprived all the time I was there of cutting saw logs and 
Live Oak, and continued to be so when I left there. I was there 
about eighteen months, including one short absence. And the latter 
residue of this Interrogatory he cannot answer. 

To the fifth Interrogatory on the part of the United States, he 
answers : 

I cannot say the Mills or Lands were injured whilst I was there, or 
the timber. 

To the sixth Interrogatory on the part of the United States, he 
answers : 

The sawing of timber was a profitable business whilst I was there. 
I do not know what Mr, Sibbald suffered in consequence of the inter- 
ference with his property interrogated about. The nett profits of the 
two Mills in operation would have been one hundred and seventy-four 
dollars and fifty-two cents : the result I have come to by a strict calcu- 
lation, founded upon running three hundred days in the year. 



47 ^ 

To the seTenlli, eightli, ninth, and tenth Interrogatories on the psirt 
of the United States, he answers: 

I know nothing but what I have ah-eady stated, or shall hereafter 
state in answer to the Interrogatories on the part of Mr. Sibbald. 

WILLIAM CARLYLE. 



To the first Interrogatory on the part of Charles F. Sibbald, he 
answers : 

I have been acquainted with said Sibbald since eighteen hundred 
and twenty-eight. 

To the second Interrogatory on the part of Charles F. Sibbald, he 
answers : 

In addition to what I have stated in my answers to the Interrogato- 
ries on the part of the United States, I can say, I have run in the Mill 
I worked forty-eight upright saws — there were four double gangs. It 
depended on the size of the lumber — the larger the lumber, the fewer 
the saws — I mean the lumber cut. 

To the third Interrogatory on the part of Charles F. Sibbald, he 
answers : 

Mr. Sibbald had ten thousand acres of Land attached to his Mills. 
It was all limber Land suitable for the use of the Mills. The place 
on which the Mills were situated was the healthiest in all that neigh- 
bourhood. It was possessed of advantages for the lumber business at 
all seasons of the year. The residue of this Interrogatory he cannot 
answer, except as he has already stated. 

To the fourth Interrogatory on the part of Charles F. Sibbald, he 
answers : 

Mr. Sibbald was prevented from cutting timber by Mr. Acken. I 
heard him tell Capt. Snowden he should not cut timber — and Capt. 
Snowden said he would cut timber. I understood Mr. Acken was the 
United States Agent for cutting Live Oak — Pine, I believe. I know 
nothing more in relation to the matters herein interrogated about than 
I have already stated. 



48 

To the fifth Interrogatory on the part of Charles F. Sibbald, he 
answers : 

I know of no contracts of any kind except Mr. Grice's, and that 
only by hearsay. 

To the sixth Interrogatory on the part of Charles F. Sibbald, he 
answers : 

I cannot say how long said Sibbald had been in peaceable posses- 
sion. The Mill I was Engineer of was put into operation. The other, 
the building of it was put up, and the machinery was all ready for it in 
Philadelphia. I run the first Mill seven months. I believe the Mills 
Avere susceptible of profitable and prosperous operation. We sold but 
very little lumber at the Mills ; it was from ten to twelve dollars per 
thousand superficial feet— twelve was the highest, but it was not the 
prime lumber. The lumber was generally sent away in vessels owned 
or chartered by Mr. Sibbald. There were no other extensive Mills at 
that time on the St. Johns River, that I know of. To the residue of 
this Interrogatory he cannot answer, except as he has already stated. 

To the seventh Interrogatory on the part of Charles F. Sibbald, he 
answers : 

I know nothing of the matters herein interrogated about. 

To the eighth Interrogatory on the part of Charles F. Sibbald, he 
answers : 

I cannot answer any matter herein inquired about. 

To the ninth Interrogatory on the part of Charles F. Sibbald, he 
answers : 

Mr. Sibbald kept a store for the sale of goods at Panama. As to 
the rest of this Interrogatory, he knows nothing. 

To the tenth Interrogatory on the part of Charles F. Sibbald, he 
answers : 

Mr. Sibbald had four vessels of his own — three of them, a ship and 
two brigs, were engaged in the business of the Mills. There were 
also several chartered vessels engaged in the business of the Mills ; the 
number I do not recollect. I recollect two, Capt. Stewart and Capt. 
Cook. To the residue of this Interrogatory he cannot answer. 



49 

To the eleventh Interrogatory on the part of Charles F. Sibbald, 
he answers: 

I know nothing. 

To the twelfth Interrogatory on the part of Charles F. Sibbald, he 
answers: 

Mr. Sibbald, through his Agent, purchased cotton raised in Florida ; 
and to the residue of this Interrogatory, he cannot answer. 

To the thirteenth Interrogatory on the part of Charles F. Sibbald, 
he answers: 

I know nothing. 

To the fourteenth Interrogatory on the part of Charles F. Sibbald, 
and also to the fifteenth Interrogatory on the part of said Sibbald, he 
answers: 

I know nothing. 

WILLIAM CARLYLE. 

Affirmed and subscribed before me, / 
this 28th day of July, A. D. 1837. ^ 

S. BADGER, Jilderman, 



DEPOSITION OF WILLIAM L. NEWBOLD, 

Of the City of Philadelphia, Gentleman, a Witness produced on the 
part of Charles F. Sibbald, and examined in the presence of the 
Attorney of the United States at Philadelphia, on the first day of 
August, A. D. 1837, affirmed and subscribed before Peter Hay, an 
Alderman of the said City of Philadelphia. 

To the first Interrogatory on the part of the United States, he 
answers: 

I do know Charles F. Sibbald, and am acquainted with a part of 
his Lands — with that part of them on the St. Johns River, near Pa- 
nama, in Florida; and I am partially acquainted with the timber on 
that tract — it was well timbered, and the quality was the long leaf 
Pine. 

To the second Interrogatory on the part of the United States, he 
answers: 

There were two Steam Saw Mills erected at Panama at the period 
of my visit — one was unfinished— I can't remember the power. The 
cost I never knew. I cannot answer as to the residue of this Inter- 
rogatory. 

To the third Interrogatory on the part of the United States, he 
answers: 

I can answer this Interrogatory only by hearsay. It was common- 
ly reported at St. Augustine, that he had been prevented exercising 
acts of ownership over his property by the Officers of the Government 
of the United States ; and further he cannot answer to this Interroga- 
tory. 

To the fourth Interrogatory on the part of the United States, he 
answers: 

I was at Panama in May or June, 1832. I there understood he had 
been deprived of his Lands two or three years ; and the residue of this 
Interrogatory he cannot answer. 



51 

To the fifth Interrogatory on the part of the United States, he 
answers: 

The Steam Saw Mills were almost ruined : they were in a state of 
dilapidation. The Engine in the finished Mill was quite valueless, 
from rust and neglect; and the saw gates useless; and nothing but the 
mere frame of the Mill-house could have been used in re-establishing 
the concern; and to the residue of this Interrogatory he cannot an- 
swer. 

To the sixth Interrogatory on the part of the United States, he 
answers: 

It was esteemed by those engaged in the sawing of timber a v«ry 
lucrative business at that time. I can answer this but vaguely ; my 
impression is, that Mr. Sibbald suffered damage to the extent of some 
hundreds of thousands of dollars. He abandoned his Mills, and in 
consequence of the acts of the Government Officers in depriving him 
of possession of his property. The fact of the Government Officers 
depriving him of his property, I know only by common report. 

To the seventh Interrogatory on the part of the United States, he 
answers: 

I cannot answer further than I have already stated in my answers 
to former Interrogatories. 

To the eighth Interrogatory on the part of the United States, he 
answers: 

I cannot answer. 

To the ninth Interrogatory on the part of the United States, he 
answers: 

I cannot answer. 

To the tenth Interrogatory on the part of the United States, he 
answers: 

I cannot answer, except what I shall hereafter state in answer to 
those Interrogatories on the part of Mr. Sibbald. 

WM. L. NEWBOLD. 



52 

To the first Interrogatory on the part of Charles F. Sibbald, he 
answers: 

I have been acquainted with Mr. Sibbald since March, eighteen 
hundred and thirty-two. 

To the second Interrogatory on the part of Charles F. Sibbald, he 
answers: 

My knowledge of the Steam Saw Mills arose from personal obser- 
vation; and further I cannot answer, except as I have already stated 
in answer to the Interrogatories on the part of the United States. 

To the third Interrogatory on the part of Charles F. Sibbald, he 
answers: 

Mr. Sibbald had some peculiar advantages for carrying on his busi- 
ness, from convenience of location, and convenience of getting timber 
from his own adjoining tract, which timber was the long leaf Pine. 
Mr. Sibbald, I understood, had other Lands in Florida, and I am igno- 
rant of those except from hearsay. The place where the Mills were 
erected was esteemed healthy in that country ; and I should think it 
was possessed of advantages for business at all seasons of the year- 
being on the bank of a navigable river, which was a channel of con- 
siderable business. I have no knowledge of the other matters inquired 
of in this Interrogatory. 

To the fourth Interrogatory on the part of Charles F. Sibbald, he 
answers: 

Mr. Sibbald had no use of his timber whilst I was there. I know 
nothing further of the matters inquired about in this Interrogatory, ex- 
cept as I have already stated in my former answers. 

To the fifth Interrogatory on the part of Charles F. Sibbald, he 
answers: 

I cannot answer. 

To the sixth Interrogatory on the part of Charles F. Sibbald, he 
answers: 

The Mills were susceptible of profitable and prosperous operation 
in my opinion. There were no other extensive Mills on the St. Johns 
River that I was aware of. I have no further knowledge as to this 
Interrogatory. 



53 

To the seventh Interrogatory on the part of Charles F. Sibbald, he 
answers: 

Mr. Sibbald had made arrangements for the use of Woodworth's 
Patent Planing Machines in said Mills, and was prevented from car- 
rying this arrangement into effect by the embarrassed condition of his 
property in Florida, and the dilapidated state of the Mills. I was one 
of the parties concerned in making the arrangement with him. To 
the residue of this Interrogatory I cannot answer. 

To the eighth Interrogatory on the part of Charles F. Sibbald, he 
answers: 

There would have been no increased power beyond that of the En- 
gine requisite. The cost of the Engine would have been the same 
with the Patent Planing Machines. Planed Flooring Boards at Phi- 
ladelphia were, and are, from forty to sixty dollars per thousand su- 
perficial feet, board measure, to the best of my knowledge. Unplaned 
flooring boards, at the same place, have rated from twenty to thirty- 
five dollars per thousand feet. I think we estimated, and I believe 
that there is, a difference of about one-fifth in the freight in favour of 
the planed boards. 

To the ninth Interrogatory on the part of Charles F. Sibbald, he 
answers: 

I cannot answer. 

To the tenth Interrogatory on the part of Charles F. Sibbald, he 
answers: 

The business of building ships, and other vessels, at Panama, could 
have been advantageously carried on, in my opinion. To the residue 
of this Interrogatory he cannot answer. 

To the eleventh, twelfth, and thirteenth Interrogatories on the part 
of Charles F. Sibbald, he answers: 

I cannot answer. 

To the fourteenth Interrogatory on the part of Charles F. Sibbald, 
he answers; 

Mr. Sibbald has suffered irretrievable loss in commercial credit, by 
reason of the measures pursued against him : I cannot estimate it.— 



54 






These measures affected him, and operated against his business pur- 
suits as a merchant, in the City of Philadelphia, for many years, and 
are still operating ; and to the residue of this Interrogatory he cannot 
answer. 

To the fifteenth Inten-ogatory on the part of Charles F. Sibbald, 
he answers: 

No other cause whatever, that I am aware of, existed for the de- 
struction of the business of the said Sibbald, except the interposition 
of the Agents or Officers of the Government of the United States. 

WM. L. NEWBOLD. 

Affirmed and subscribed before me, ) 
this 1st day of August, A. D. 1837. ^ 

PETER HAY, Alderman. 



J^ote — In order to facilitate the investigation of his claim, on the 
early meeting of Congress, the Claimant, through his counsel, obtain- 
ed copies of the evidence as taken in Philadelphia thus far, and with 
the view of continuing the printing of that that was taken at Florida 
and elsewhere, when it should be received at the Treasury Depart- 
ment; the Claimant, on suggesting the same to the Solicitor of the 
Treasury, he thought it more proper that the printing should be or- 
dered by Congress, and it was then discontinued. 



LB N '10 



